Just take a second to look at that. The Pac 10 was already a murder’s row and now this? Brutal.

Would the Big 12 dissolve? Would Nebraska and Missouri join the Big Ten? Would Baylor, Kansas, Kansas State, and Iowa State along with Boise State, Houston, and Nevada join the Mountain West?

If the Big 12 stays intact, does it go after Houston and TCU and drop back into the Big 8?

There are so many scenarios to contemplate and I’m absolutely floored that the Pac 10 is actually leading the charge. I guess that’s what happens when you bring in a new commissioner who is not afraid to shake things up and start making the conference money… and make no mistake, this proposed 16-team conference will make gobs of money (within Brown’s story, he references a TV network that would pay out $20M to each school).

One of the more interesting things about this development is that the Big Ten is not driving this train. For months, the conventional thinking was that the dominos would start to fall into place after the Big Ten made its advances on teams, but that clearly isn’t the case. Also, the Big Ten’s targets have everything to do with television revenue and very little to do with bettering the conference by adding good football teams. No disrespect to Rutgers, Pitt, Syracuse, Missouri, Nebraska, and Notre Dame (the six teams, five of which would be added, most commonly mentioned as targets), but none of those teams are anywhere near the caliber of Texas or Oklahoma.

If expansion and super conferences are going to happen (and all signs seem to be pointing that way), then the Pac 10 has made an extremely shrewd move by moving first. Since everyone wants Texas (the Big Ten, the SEC) it’s not a tactical error for the Pac 10 to show its hand and leak this story. It puts them on the offensive and makes all of the other conferences play defense.

Perhaps an unintended consequence of these super conferences (or maybe it is an intended consequence, but I’ll let my cynicism rest just this once) is that we’re going to see less compelling out-of-conference scheduling. These super conferences are combining some of the best programs into one conference, and by virtue of that an already difficult league (I’d argue that the Pac 10 was already difficult) becomes even tougher. So expect to see a lot more WAC teams on the schedule as opposed to Big Ten teams, which is exactly what the SEC and the Big 12 have been doing anyway for the past few years (minus one game here and there for each team occasionally: see, e.g. Oklahoma v. Miami, Oklahoma State v. Georgia, Texas v. Ohio State). Also, depending on how scheduling works with these new super conferences, it’s going to be extremely difficult for any team to go undefeated.

Back to the specific teams in this proposed 16-team monolith. If A&M does not want to merge with the Pac 10 and would rather go to the SEC, then they should do it because they are definitely replaceable. In all honesty, Baylor might be a better option given its [due to the legitimate outcry of A&M supporters, I've removed the "academic" part of that statement; I misspoke, shoot me.] rising programs (in football and basketball). I’d argue that they are also a much better fit than Texas Tech if just for the travel reasons alone… Waco is a lot easier to get to than Lubbock.

Brown’s story also mentions Oklahoma’s desire to join the SEC, but I’m wondering why. If it separates itself from Texas, then it’ll have a harder time recruiting in the state that produces a boatload of its players (58 Texans are on the Oklahoma roster this year). While it’ll be able to recruit Louisiana better and maybe Florida (but not as much, since OU would be in the SEC West), that’s nothing compared to what it would lose out on in Texas. My guess is that OU’s Sooner Schooner is permanently hitched directly to Bevo. Wisely.

Along the same lines, given the plethora of football talent in Texas, it would be nice for the current Pac 10 schools to mine that ground. They already have inroads in Southern California; opening up Texas would make the Pac 10 extremely formidable and would have a good chance to topple the SEC from its perch as the King of All Conferences.

The top three Super 16 teams today are:
1. Texas
2. USC
3. Oklahoma

The top three SEC teams today are:
1. Alabama
2. Florida
3. LSU

You could argue that Oregon is the third-best team in the Super 16 and you’d have a very strong argument. Cal, Oregon State, Stanford, Oklahoma State and perhaps someday Washington will vie to be included in the top three as well. As for the SEC, there is a huge drop off after LSU. Georgia, Auburn, and Tennessee rise up occasionally, but the top three SEC programs are firmly entrenched. Georgia is having some issues, Auburn is on the come I kind of like what they’re doing, and Tennessee is suffering from the post-Fulmer years and the abortion that was the Lane Kiffin “era.” I’m not disparaging the SEC, far from it, outside of watching UW play it’s my favorite college football conference to watch, by far. But it’s just not as deep as this new Super 16 conference could be (I’m not referring to the fact that it has four more teams, but the quality of the teams from top-to-bottom, Washington State and Colorado are the only two teams that are currently in poor shape).

Regardless, interesting news out of San Francisco and more proof (if any was needed) that football rules the college landscape.

“I’ve just seen the piece,” Scott said in an e-mail “No decisions made, No offers extended. We meet this weekend and I’m not anticipating any definitive decisions coming out. Still exploring lots of interesting options for the Pac-10.”

… where there’s smoke, there’s a guy who is burning up the phone lines trying to build a super conference. Nice, work Larry Scott, you earned your money today.